Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 269
» Latest member: LostSheep
» Forum threads: 6,389
» Forum posts: 11,945

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 308 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 305 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Google

Latest Threads
Prominent COVID jab criti...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
5 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 51
Purgatory Explained by th...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
7 hours ago
» Replies: 2
» Views: 94
Twenty-fourth Sunday afte...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:17 AM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 8,064
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Da...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:10 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 4,891
From Fr. Shouppe's 'Purga...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:16 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 68
Archbishop Viganò: Homily...
Forum: Archbishop Viganò
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:11 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 76
Fr. Luigi Villa: There is...
Forum: Add'nl Clergy
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:04 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 70
The Dominican 'Libera me,...
Forum: Catholic Hymns
Last Post: Stone
11-02-2024, 07:31 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 101
November 2nd - All Souls ...
Forum: November
Last Post: Stone
11-02-2024, 07:26 AM
» Replies: 9
» Views: 17,131
Outlines of New Testament...
Forum: Church Doctrine & Teaching
Last Post: Stone
11-02-2024, 06:25 AM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 612

 
  Digital ID awareness documentary- STATE OF CONTROL
Posted by: Deus Vult - 12-16-2022, 12:19 PM - Forum: Global News - Replies (1)

 Trailer for the documentary- 90 seconds long.
The links to both the trailer and full documentary are below.
 

A SHOCKING AND REVEALING DOCUMENTARY!
WATCH THE MOVIE 
WATCH THE TRAILER FIRST
BEKIJK EERST DE TRAILER
BEKIJK DE FILM 

ABOUT THE MOVIE
"State of control", the control society is increasingly becoming a reality.

What is the price of convenience?

The CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) and the digital passport can make our lives easier and more efficient. But new international legislation shows that the purpose of these possibilities, has far-reaching implications for our privacy.
In this documentary international experts such as Edward Snowden, Arno Wellens, Catherine Austin Fitts express their serious concerns and criticisms. It compiles the range of facts and opinions, creating a shocking picture about the future of mankind. A crystal-clear narrative that can''t be ignored.

Print this item

  California parish requires Catholics to sign waiver before receiving Communion kneeling
Posted by: Stone - 12-16-2022, 08:15 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism - No Replies

California parish requires Catholics to sign waiver before receiving Communion kneeling

[Image: vqr7k26oufq8ury5i32dnnxbgoz3f801qgzvp49....ormat=webp]


Dec 15, 2022
(LifeSiteNews (adapted)) – A Catholic parish in the Diocese of San Bernardino is requiring parishioners to sign waivers before receiving Holy Communion kneeling – a move that may violate Church law.

St. Kateri Tekakwitha Catholic Community in Beaumont and Banning, California, announced the rule in a bulletin for the week of December 18, 2022.

The bulletin notes that the parish “highly discouraged the receiving of [C]ommunion while kneeling down” due to unspecified “incidents that happened in the past caused by people kneeling down when receiving [C]ommunion.”

The parish church “does not have [C]ommunion rails or kneelers to assist you when you get up and so you will be responsible for any harm that will cause to your body or to the ministers and people around you if you will have an accident,” the bulletin adds. “If you would like to continue receiving [C]ommunion kneeling down, we ask that you sign a waiver that releases our parish for any liability that may arise due to your action.”

“You will also be legally responsible,” it continues, “for any harm that your action may cause to the ministers or the people around you when taking [C]ommunion kneeling down,” which was the standard practice of the Catholic Church for centuries until the 1960s.

The recommendation against receiving the Eucharist while kneeling “is for your safety and the safety of our ministers and the people around you, and also to protect the sanctity of the Body and Blood of Christ,” the bulletin further stated.

The parish failed to note, however, that reception of the Eucharist in the hand inevitably risks particles of the Host falling to the floor and being trampled, a situation decried by Bishop Athanasius Schneider as “one of the grievous phenomenons and evils within the Church.”

The Catholic Church teaches dogmatically that every particle of the Holy Eucharist contains the entire Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.

St. Kateri Tekakwitha parish’s waiver requirement, moreover, appears to violate Church law.

The Vatican Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum stresses that priests may not deny the Eucharist to Catholics in good standing who wish to receive the Blessed Sacrament kneeling. “Therefore, it is not licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ’s faithful solely on the grounds, for example, that the person wishes to receive the Eucharist kneeling or standing.”

The document invokes Canon 843 of the Code of Canon Law, which states, “Sacred ministers cannot deny the sacraments to those who seek them at appropriate times, are properly disposed, and are not prohibited by law from receiving them.”

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) also make clear that the faithful may receive Communion kneeling without impediment.

Church leaders known for their orthodoxy have praised reception of the Eucharist kneeling and on the tongue as the most reverent form of taking Communion.

Cardinal Robert Sarah, the former head of the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, has said that receiving Communion kneeling and on the tongue “is much more suited to the sacrament itself” and “a further act of adoration and love that each of us can offer to Jesus Christ.” His comments echo those of other previous Vatican liturgy chiefs, including Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera.

Cardinal Sarah has linked reception of the Eucharist standing and in the hand to a “diabolical attack” on the Catholic faith. He noted that Pope John Paul II “forced his broken body to kneel” for Holy Communion even in his advanced age.


St. Kateri Tekakwitha parish lists LGBT ‘ministry’

In addition to announcing the waiver rule, St. Kateri Tekakwitha parish’s December 18 bulletin lists an LGBT-themed “ministry” titled “Ministry with Families & Friends of LGBT,” with a coordinator named Gloria Austin.

The Diocese of San Bernardino has a similarly named “Ministry to Families with Gay and Lesbian Catholics,” which also lists Austin as a contact. The diocesan organization’s website includes links to Outreach, a heterodox LGBT activism group founded by Father James Martin, SJ, and the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBT pressure group in the United States and a staunch proponent of “gender transitions” for children.

The bishop of the San Bernardino diocese is Alberto Rojas, one of several U.S. prelates who signed a statement last year organized by the Tyler Clementi Foundation, another pro-LGBT activist group, telling homosexual youth that “God is on your side.” Rojas withdrew the faculties of a priest in his diocese who criticized him for signing the statement.

Rojas, a Mexican national, was a student at the Archdiocese of Chicago’s infamous Casa Jesús program for Hispanic immigrants, which shut down in 2016 amid pedophilia and homosexuality scandals.

Print this item

  A Most Important Historical Document
Posted by: Stone - 12-16-2022, 06:41 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism - No Replies

A most important historical document:
the 1969 Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani (the original GIRM) - "The Lord's Supper, or Mass, is the sacred meeting or congregation of the people of God assembled, the priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord..."


Rorate Caeli | December 13, 2022

Eleven years ago, in 2011, we in RORATE were proud to be the first to make available online, for the first time, a document that had then become extremely rare: the very first GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal), published together with the 1969 Novus Ordo Missae.


From our post:

Quote:7. Cena dominica sive Missa est sacra synaxis seu congregatio populi Dei in unum convenientis, sacerdote praeside, ad memoriale Domini celebrandum. Quare de sanctae Ecclesiae locali congregatione eminenter valet promissio Christi: "Ubi sunt duo vel tres congregati in nomine meo, ibi sum in medio eorum" (Mt. 18, 20).

"7. The Lord's Supper, or Mass, is the sacred meeting or congregation of the people of God assembled, the priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord. For this reason, Christ's promise applies eminently to such a local gathering of holy Church: 'Where two or three come together in my name, there am I in their midst' (Mt. 18:20)." [Most of the elements of this statement has been condemned by the Council of Trent - The Catacombs]

This is the original complete definition of the Mass according to the 1969 Novus Ordo Missae: they were arguably the most influential liturgical words written in the 20th century and signaled a watershed moment - in a sense, closing the book written since late antiquity and the chapter begun in Sessions XIII and XXII of the Council of Trent.

Number 7 of the first edition of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani (the General Instruction of the Roman Missal - GIRM) is the end moment of the original liturgical movement. Its writers also thought they would have the final say in the history of the Traditional Mass - within a few months, the storm started by these words on the edge of acceptability would spark the Brief Critical Study of the New Order of the Mass, presented to the Pope and to the Catholic world under the auspices of Cardinals Ottaviani, first Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Bacci.

The waves set by that text have not subsided. That famous number 7 and other highly problematic words of the original 1969 IGMR (in which Trent is not mentioned a single time) and Ordo Missae would be amended in 1970, 1975, and 2002. While much was vindicated by the swift and significant corrections of 1970 - and, ultimately, by the proclamation by Pope Benedict XVI that the traditional Roman Missal was "never abrogated -, can it be denied that the spirit of the 1969 IGMR lives on in the New Mass, or "Ordinary Form"?

While the texts of the 1970, 1975, and 2002 IGMR are widely available, it had been impossible up to now to find online the original source of the controversy. Thanks to the generous effort of a priestly source, RORATE can now present to our readers the original 1969 Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani. (Note: this is the entire IGMR, but only the first pages of the original complete publication of the 1969 Ordo Missae, promulgated on April 3, 1969, by the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, of Pope Paul VI.)


***


The Catacombs - excerpts from the Council of Trent
  • If any one saith, that in the mass a true and proper sacrifice is not offered to God; or, that to be offered is nothing else but that Christ is given us to eat; let him be anathema.
  • If any one saith, that by those words, Do this for the commemoration of me (Luke xxii. 19), Christ did not institute the apostles priests; or, did not ordain that they, and other priests should offer His own body and blood; let him be anathema.
  • If any one saith, that the sacrifice of the mass is only a sacrifice of praise and of thanksgiving; or, that it is a bare commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross, but not a propitiatory sacrifice; or, that it profits him only who receives; and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead for sins, pains, satisfactions, and other necessities; let him be anathema.
  • If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema.
  • lf any one saith, that Christ, given in the Eucharist, is eaten spiritually only, and not also sacramentally and really; let him be anathema.

See also: The New Mass: Article recommended by Archbp. Lefebvre

A few other points, taken from here, The Dangers of the New Mass:
  • It was Martin Luther who said, "The Mass is not a sacrifice ... call it Benediction, Eucharist, the Lord's Table, the Lord's Supper, Memory of the Lord or whatever you like, just so long as you do not dirty it with the name of a Sacrifice."
  • In the Encyclical Mediator Dei, Pope Pius XII condemned the statement that "the eucharistic sacrifice" is an authentic concelebration of the priest as well as of the people present.
  • 7th Session, Canon 13 of the Council of Trent: The correct Latin translation says:
    Quote:"If anyone says that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, customarily used in the solemn administration of the Sacraments, can be despised or can be freely omitted by the ministers without sin, or can be changed into other new rites by any pastor in the Church whomsoever, let him be anathema."

    This canon states very clearly that the Pope, who is the first and supreme pastor may never change any approved Rite of the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Rite was fixed forever by Pope St. Pius V in Quo Primum. Paul VI tried to establish a whole new Roman Rite. There is only one Roman Rite of the Mass; there cannot be two.

Print this item

  We Are About To Witness A Major Move Toward A Cashless Society
Posted by: Stone - 12-15-2022, 06:00 AM - Forum: Global News - No Replies

We Are About To Witness A Major Move Toward A Cashless Society

[Image: Cashless-Society-Pixabay-600x375.jpg?itok=j2lVrnT0]


ZH | DEC 14, 2022
Authored by Michael Snyder via The End of The American Dream blog,

The war on cash has just gone to an entirely new level.  When I heard that the European Union was planning to completely ban all cash transactions above 10,000 euros, I had a hard time believing it.  There are so many wild rumors flying around on the Internet these days, and so I wasn’t going to write about this unless I could confirm it.  Unfortunately, this particular rumor is quite real.

Under the pretext of fighting “money laundering and terrorist financing”, the European Union will be entirely outlawing all cash payments greater than 10,000 euros.

The following comes from the official website of the Council of the European Union

Quote:By limiting large cash payments, the EU will make it harder for criminals to launder dirty money. An EU-wide maximum limit of €10.000 is set for cash payments. Member states will have the flexibility to impose a lower maximum limit if they wish.

So this means that in some countries the upper limit could potentially be a lot lower than 10,000 euros.

But instead of framing it as a major move toward a cashless society, the EU is trying to claim that this is all about fighting terrorists.

The following is what Zbyněk Stanjura, the Minister for Finance in the Czech Republic, has said about this upcoming change

Quote:Terrorists and those who finance them are not welcome in Europe. In order to launder dirty money, criminal individuals and organisations had to look for loopholes in our existing rules which are already quite strict. But our intention is to close these loopholes further, and to apply even stricter rules in all EU member states. Large cash payments beyond €10.000 will become impossible. Trying to stay anonymous when buying or selling crypto-assets will become much more difficult. Hiding behind multiple layers of ownership of companies won’t work any more. It will even become difficult to launder dirty money via jewellers or goldsmiths.

Meanwhile, the European Central Bank has been actively considering the possibility of introducing a “digital euro”.  The following comes from the official website of the European Central Bank…

Quote:We are working with the national central banks of the euro area to investigate whether to introduce a digital euro. It would be a central bank digital currency, an electronic equivalent to cash. And it would complement banknotes and coins, giving people an additional choice about how to pay.

Well isn’t that convenient?

As they take cash away from the general population, it turns out that they have already been working on the replacement.

Incredibly, the ECB even has the gall to claim that this new digital currency will be “like cash”…

Quote:A digital euro would offer an electronic means of payment that anyone could use in the euro area. It would be secure and user-friendly, like cash is today. As central bank money issued by the ECB, it would be different from “private money”, but you could also use a card or a phone app to pay with digital euro.

Yes, you will be able to spend it just like you can spend cash.

But unlike cash, a digital euro will allow authorities to track whatever you buy and sell with it.

Won’t that be wonderful?

By the way, the Federal Reserve is currently working on a digital currency as well.

And this is all happening as the private cryptocurrency industry is imploding all around us.

Many had believed that decentralized cryptocurrencies would be the future of commerce, but global central banks were never going to allow that to happen.

Instead, it appears that they intend to force all of us on to a cashless grid in which everyone uses digital currencies that are issued by them.

Needless to say, a lot of people out there are quite wary of any moves toward a cashless society because they believe that it is part of the “end times” scenario described in the Bible.  According to one recent survey, approximately 39 percent of all Americans are convinced that we are living in the “end times” right now

Quote:Nearly two in five Americans, including half of self-identified Christians and a quarter of the religiously unaffiliated, agree “we are living in the End Times,” a new study has found.

That’s about 39% of Americans who believe we are living in the End Times, according to Pew Research, highlighted by Lifeway Research.

Other surveys have come up with similar results.

[...]

If you have been waiting for life to “return to normal”, you can stop right now.

It simply is not going to happen, and I believe that global events will accelerate even more during the early stages of 2023.

Print this item

  How Vaccination Status May Affect Car Insurance Rates
Posted by: Stone - 12-14-2022, 11:17 AM - Forum: General Commentary - No Replies

Social credit...



People who skipped their COVID vaccine are at higher risk of traffic accidents, according to a new study
The findings could justify changes to driver insurance policies, the authors say.


Fortune.com [slightly adapted] | December 13, 2022


If you passed on getting the COVID vaccine, you might be a lot more likely to get into a car crash.

Or at least those are the findings of a new study published this month in The American Journal of Medicine. During the summer of 2021, Canadian researchers examined the encrypted government-held records of more than 11 million adults, 16% of whom hadn’t received the COVID vaccine.

They found that the unvaccinated people were 72% more likely to be involved in a severe traffic crash—in which at least one person was transported to the hospital—than those who were vaccinated. That’s similar to the increased risk of car crashes for people with sleep apnea, though only about half that of people who abuse alcohol, researchers found.

The excess risk of car crash posed by unvaccinated drivers “exceeds the safety gains from modern automobile engineering advances and also imposes risks on other road users,” the authors wrote.

Of course, skipping a COVID vaccine does not mean that someone will get into a car crash. Instead, the authors theorize that people who resist public health recommendations might also “neglect basic road safety guidelines.”

Why would they ignore the rules of the road? Distrust of the government, a belief in freedom, misconceptions of daily risks, “faith in natural protection,” “antipathy toward regulation,” poverty, misinformation, a lack of resources, and personal beliefs are potential reasons proposed by the authors.

The findings are significant enough that primary care doctors should consider counseling unvaccinated patients on traffic safety—and insurance companies might base changes to insurance policies on vaccination data, the authors suggest.

First responders may also consider taking precautions to protect themselves from COVID when responding to traffic crashes, the authors added, as it’s more likely that a driver is unvaccinated than vaccinated. 

“The findings suggest that unvaccinated adults need to be careful indoors with other people and outside with surrounding traffic,” the authors concluded.

This isn’t the first time that researchers have examined the link between behavior and vaccination status. Among young adults, a 2021 study published in the Journal of Bioeconomics found a correlation between self-reported risky driving and having skipped their flu vaccine. It examined the survey responses of more than 100,000 Canadians.

Print this item

  Saving Benedict XVI -Schizophrenia or Hypocrisy?
Posted by: Stone - 12-14-2022, 08:45 AM - Forum: Sedevacantism - No Replies

From The Catacombs archives:


Saving Benedict XVI -Schizophrenia or Hypocrisy?


TIA | February 2019

In the Gospel of Luke we read that Christ told the crowds: "When you see a cloud rising from the West, presently you say: A shower is coming: and so it happeneth: And when ye see the south wind blow, you say: There will be heat: and it cometh to pass. You hypocrites, you know how to discern the face of the heaven and of the earth: but how is it that you do not discern this time?" (Lk 12: 54)

Perhaps, there is no warning from Our Lord that it is more appropriate for the time in which we live today.

For years now, and especially since the current phase of the calamitous project of the destruction of the Faith that moved to high speed with Pope Francis’ reign, many priests and laymen react surprised and scandalized over the buffoon we see sitting on the cathedra of St. Peter.

[Image: I043_UN.jpg]

Benedict praises the United Nations in a speech, later, Francis follows suit. No break, but continuity...

If I were to speak of surprise, I would like to say that the surprise is mine and also of many others like me who for years have been fighting Progressivism, this neo-modernism that managed to reach the highest places in the Hierarchy of the Church. "Felix qui pout rerum cognoscere cause" said Virgil (Fortunate is he who was able to know the causes of things).

This surprise is due, today more than ever, to the emergence of absurd theories that claim to show that there is a radical break between Francis and the other Popes of the post-Vatican II Council, to the point of supposing that Francis would not be Pope.

So, today I want to expound, on the one hand, on the almost delusional incoherence of this position and, on the other, on the danger there is in abandoning oneself to the guidance of those who, based on extravagant and arbitrary whims, claim to uphold superficially (or at times through a merely emotional fanaticism) a movement without its feet set in reality, like the ones who hate Francis (the consequence), but have nostalgia for Benedict (one of the causes of Francis' election).


The words of Benedict himself

Those who support such nonsense not only seem to act as schizophrenics, but are also publicly denied by Benedict himself who has repeatedly stated that his resignation has been well-deliberated and definitive.

In his book on his conversations with Benedict XVI titled Last Testament: In His Own Words, Peter Seewald reproduces the words of Benedict XVI regarding his resignation. He explains that Benedict's central statement is this:
Quote:“But no one has tried to blackmail me. If that had been attempted I would not have gone since you are not permitted to leave because you're under pressure." (London, Bloomsbury, p. 72)

Benedict XVI cannot be clearer when he says that:
Quote:"So I wrote the text of the resignation, I cannot say with precision when, but at the most 14 days beforehand. I wrote it in Latin because something so important you do in Latin." (Ibid., pp. 60-61)

He adds:
Quote:"A weak point is perhaps my lack of clear, purposeful governance and the decisions that have to be made there.,. So, practical governance is not my forte, and there, I would say, is a certain weakness." (Ibid., pp. 255-256).

Furthermore, in a letter addressed to the Secretariat of the Prefect for Communication, Msgr. Dário Edoardo Viganò, which he writes on the occasion of the presentation of the Collection, The Theology of Pope Francis, Benedict XVI says that there is an "internal continuity" between his pontificate and that of Francis.

[Image: I043_Union.jpg]

Always praise and warmth for Francis and his 'mercy'

His words are:
Quote:"I welcome this initiative which intends to oppose and react to the foolish prejudice according to which Pope Francis would be only a practical man deprived of particular theological or philosophical formation, whereas I was only a theoretician of theology who understood little of the concrete life of a Christian today."

And he adds:
Quote:"These small volumes rightly show that Pope Francis is a man of profound philosophical and theological formation and, therefore, help us to see the interior continuity between the two pontificates, although with all the differences of style and temperament."


Furthermore, on June 28, 2016, on the anniversary of the 65th priestly ordination of Benedict, a ceremony was held in Clementine Hall, where Pope Francis was also present. In his brief final greeting, Benedict XVI speaks again of mercy:
Quote:"Thanks above all to you, Holy Father! Your kindness, from the first moment of the election, in each moment of my life here, really moves me inside."

[Image: I043_Mosque.jpg]

Francis follows Benedict's footsteps and prays with an iman at a mosque in Turkey

He continues:
Quote:"More than in the Vatican Gardens, with their beauty, your kindness is the place where I live: I feel protected. Thanks also to the word of thanks, of everything. We hope that you can go forward with all of us on this path of divine mercy, showing us the path of Jesus towards Jesus, towards God."

Finally, the letters of Benedict XVI to Cardinal Brandmüller - which have recently been published - absolutely destroy any dream of those Ratzingherians who pretend that he is still the Pope. In the first letter of November 9, 2017, Benedict XVI states as clearly as possible that only Francis is the Pope.

His words to the Cardinal are these:
Quote:"As Pope Emeritus, I tried to create a situation in which I was absolutely inaccessible to the mass media and in which it was fully clear that there is only one Pope."

We see that the Ratzingherians try to show that the resignation of Benedict XVI is invalid are baseless. The arguments put forward do not proceed. However, those "arguments," despite their variety, lead to a single result: Benedict XVI is still Pope and, so, Francis is not a true Pope.


Self-delusional attempts to justify 'Pope Benedict'

This speaks volumes about the real reason for these attempts: It is not so important to understand how things are, but rather what end they want to reach, which is to state that Francis is not a true Pope - in one way or another.

[Image: I043_Cont.jpg]

Clear continuity among the Vatican II Popes

So, with the clarification of the words of Benedict XVI himself declaring that he is not Pope and that the pontificate of Francis is in continuity with the preceding ones, what are we left to think? I believe that there are only two things we can think:

1. Those who say Benedict is Pope are in a state of trauma because they cannot sincerely admit that Francis is an extension of Benedict. This would be something like a kind of spiritual schizophrenia that prevents them from reconciling cause and effect because they will not accept that Benedict has abandoned them.

2. Or, those who promote this theory are hypocritical scoundrels who simply want to take advantage, confuse people and, through this confusion, constitute themselves as an infallible criterion for determining who is and who is not the Pope.

If we give these people the benefit of the doubt and consider that they are innocent, then, they do what they do out of ignorance or from the painful disappointment they possibly have upon learning that "Saint Benedict" is an example far from what holiness is.

[Image: I043_Circus.jpg]

Benedict and Francis: hosting immoral performance and circus shows in the Vatican hall

Yes, it is not just Francis' fault if there is a decline of the Faith in the whole world. The catastrophic situation in which the Church finds herself is the result of years and years of attacks directed against the doctrine, the liturgy and, in general, everything that represents the Kingdom of Christ in society.

For the sake of the argument, if we admit the hypothesis that Benedict resigned under the pressure of a mafia, this mafia could not have had power unless if had been bolstered by the previous conciliar Popes and by Benedict himself. Should we also blame Francis for this?

At any rate, it does not seem a very honest or courageous position for a Pope who resigns and abandons the flock when the wolf is inside it.

It is enough here to remember the following words of Christ:

"But the hireling, and he that is not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and flieth: and the wolf catcheth, and scattereth the sheep: And the hireling flieth, because he is a hireling: and he hath no care for the sheep." (Jn 10: 12)

In short for decades, our Pontiffs have wandered around as if they were drunk. Their dependence on the absinthe of Progressivism and Modernism continually increase. They roam in the dark night of Humanism. Perhaps the Bavarian has better hidden his intention than the Argentinian, but at the end of the day, both walk hand in hand, singing the same tango and staggering in the same direction.

It is up to us to not lose sight of what the Prince of the Apostles said: "Sobrii estote et vigilate: qui adversarius vester diabolus, tamquam leo rugiens, circuit quærens quem devoret: qui resistite fortes in fide." Be sober, be watchful! For your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking someone to devour. Resist him, steadfast in the faith. (I Pet 5: 8-9)

Christus Rex - Adveniat Regnum Tuum

Print this item

  Kyiv Seizes Assets Of Russian Orthodox Clerics
Posted by: Stone - 12-14-2022, 06:51 AM - Forum: Global News - No Replies

Kyiv Seizes Assets Of Russian Orthodox Clerics

[Image: monasteryukr.jpg?itok=ZaAc8okP]

St. Michael's Golden-Domed Monastery in Kiev, Ukraine. Wikipedia image


ZH | DEC 14, 2022
Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute,

Ukraine has ratcheted up its campaign against a branch of the Eastern Orthodox church with ties to Russia. On the order of President Volodymyr Zelensky, seven senior clerics from the Russian Orthodox church will have their assets seized and face bans on a range of economic and legal activities.

During his nightly video address on Sunday, the Ukrainian president said "by decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, sanctions were applied against seven people," adding that his administration is "doing everything to ensure that the aggressor state does not have a single string of Ukrainian society to pull."

According to Reuters, the new penalties mean that the seven clerics will have "their assets seized and are subject to a ban on a range of economic and legal activities as well as a de facto travel ban."

The vast majority of Ukrainians belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church, with many worshiping in parishes that take direction from the Moscow Patriarchate. On December 1, Zelensky announced that Kiev would attempt to expel all religious institutions with ties to Russia, arguing the move would make it "impossible for religious organizations affiliated with centers of influence in the Russian Federation to operate in Ukraine."

The president went on the claim that the Russian Orthodox Church poses a threat to Ukrainian culture, saying "we will never allow anyone to build an empire inside the Ukrainian soul."

He additionally denounced Ukrainians who continue to attend the allegedly Russia-controlled parishes as succumbing to "the temptation of evil."


Kiev has conducted a series of raids on Russian Orthodox parishes and claims to have uncovered clerics attempting to subvert the Ukrainian government, though has provided little evidence to support its assertions.

Nonetheless, Kiev sanctioned 10 top clerics of the church last week, suggesting they threatened "the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine."

Print this item

  Quotes from Saints and Theologians: 'Recognizing' the Pope
Posted by: Stone - 12-13-2022, 11:35 AM - Forum: Sedevacantism - No Replies

Quotes from Saints and Theologians: 'Recognizing' the Pope

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginal...ipo=images]


St. Peter’s instruction

The first pope St. Peter († 67) gave us the general principle of disobedience to, and resistance of, corrupt hierarchies and their commands when he was forbidden to preach Christ by the apostate Jews. When there is a conflict between the will of a religious superior and God, we are to obey God:
Quote:“But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men.” (Acts 5:29)

The Doctor Saint Thomas Aquinas O.P († 1274) used this incident as an indication that all superiors are to be disobeyed should their commands be against the Will of God:
Quote:“It is written: ‘We ought to obey God rather than men.’ Now sometimes the things commanded by a superior are against God. Therefore, superiors are not to be obeyed in all things.” (Summa Theologiae, IIa IIae, Q. 104, A. 5)

The theologian Juan Cardinal De Torquemada O.P. († 1468) expressly related that Bible passage to the duty to resist a wayward pontiff:
Quote:“Although it clearly follows from the circumstances that the Pope can err at times, and command things which must not be done, that we are not to be simply obedient to him in all things, that does not show that he must not be obeyed by all when his commands are good. To know in what cases he is to be obeyed and in what not, it is said in the Acts of the Apostles: 'One ought to obey God rather than man'; therefore, were the Pope to command anything against Holy Scripture, or the articles of faith, or the truth of the Sacraments, or the commands of the natural or divine law, he ought not to be obeyed, but in such commands, to be passed over.” (Summa de Ecclesia)

So, “superiors are not to be obeyed in all things”; a “pope can err at times, and command things which must not be done” and “we are not to be simply obedient to him in all things.” A pope can command “against Holy Scripture, or the articles of faith, or the truth of the Sacraments, or the commands of the natural or divine law” and then “he ought not to be obeyed.”



St. Paul’s example

Pope St. Peter I himself was publicly resisted to his face by St. Paul because he endangered the truth of the Gospel.
Quote:“But when Cephas [Peter] was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.” (Galatians 2:11)

The Fathers of the Church explained that the incident shows us the correctness of resisting wayward ecclesiastics, even popes. The great Scripture commentator Cornelius a Lapide († 1637) wrote as follows:
Quote:“Superiors may be admonished by their subordinates in all humility and charity so that truth may be defended: this is the basis (Galatians 2, 11) on which St. Augustine, St. Cyprian, St. Gregory, St. Thomas and many others who are quoted support this opinion. They teach quite unequivocally that St. Peter, although superior in authority to St. Paul, was admonished by him. St. Gregory rightly states that, “Peter remained silent so that, being first in the hierarchy of the Apostles, he might equally be first in humility.” St. Augustine writes, “By showing that superiors admit that they may be rebuked by their subordinates, St. Peter gave posterity an example of saintliness more noteworthy than that given by St. Paul, although the latter showed, nonetheless, that it is possible for subordinates to have the boldness to resist their superiors without fear, when in all charity they speak out in the defence of truth.”“ (Commentary Ad Gal., II, 11.)

So, the Doctor St. Augustine told us that we should “boldly” resist superiors, including the Pope, “without fear”, when we are defending the Faith.

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that the Scripture passage shows that a pope who errs from the Faith must be resisted openly and publicly because of the danger which exists for the Faithful to be corrupted and led into error:
Quote:“There being an imminent danger for the Faith, prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects. Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, questioned him publicly on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith. And, as the Glossa of St. Augustine puts it (Ad Galatas 2.14), 'St. Peter himself gave the example to those who govern so that if sometimes they stray from the right way, they will not reject a correction as unworthy even if it comes from their subjects.” (Summa Theologiae, IIa IIae, Q. 33, A. 4)

He also commented on it as follows:
Quote:“The reprehension was just and useful, and the reason for it was not light: there was a danger for the preservation of Gospel truth. […] The way it took place was appropriate, since it was public and manifest. For this reason, St. Paul writes: 'I spoke to Cephas,' that is, Peter, 'before everyone,' since the simulation practiced by St. Peter was fraught with danger to everyone.” (Super Epistulas S. Pauli, Ad Galatas, 2, 11-14 (Taurini/ Rome: Marietti, 1953), lec. III, nn. 83f.)

That is how a heretical pope and his errors are to be resisted: “boldly”, “without fear”, “publicly” and “before everyone”, because he is a “danger to everyone”. That is the teaching of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church.



The instruction of the Popes

Various popes have also told us that popes can err from the Faith and should then be resisted.

Pope Innocent III († 1216) stated that a pope can “wither away into heresy” and “not believe” the Faith:
Quote:“The pope should not flatter himself about his power, nor should he rashly glory in his honour and high estate, because the less he is judged by man, the more he is judged by God. Still the less can the Roman Pontiff glory, because he can be judged by men, or rather, can be shown to be already judged, if for example he should wither away into heresy, because “he who does not believe is already judged.” (St. John 3:18) In such a case it should be said of him: ‘If salt should lose its savour, it is good for nothing but to be cast out and trampled under foot by men.’” (Sermo 4)

Venerable Pope Pius IX († 1878) recognised the danger that a future pope would be a heretic and “teach contrary to the Catholic Faith”, and he instructed, “do not follow him.”:
Quote:“If a future pope teaches anything contrary to the Catholic Faith, do not follow him.” (Letter to Bishop Brizen)

Pope Adrian II († 872) admitted that papal heresy “renders lawful the resistance of subordinates to their superiors, and their rejection of the latter's pernicious teachings.”:
Quote:“We read that the Roman Pontiff has always possessed authority to pass judgment on the heads of all the Churches (i.e., the patriarchs and bishops), but nowhere do we read that he has been the subject of judgment by others. It is true that Honorius was posthumously anathematised by the Eastern churches, but it must be borne in mind that he had been accused of heresy, the only offence which renders lawful the resistance of subordinates to their superiors, and their rejection of the latter's pernicious teachings”.

However, I must disagree with Pope Adrian when he said that heresy was the only offence that justified resistance: the Saints and Doctors have informed us otherwise, as we shall see.

Further, Pope Honorius I († 638) was not merely “accused of heresy” or “anathematised by the Eastern Churches”: he was anathematised as a heretic by the ecumenical Council of III Constantinople, whose Acts were confirmed by Pope Leo II († 683):
Quote:“We foresaw that, together with them, also Honorius, before Pope of Old Rome, is cast out of the Holy Catholic Church of God and anathematized, for we have found by his writings sent to [the heretic] Sergius, that he followed the thinking of the latter in everything, and continued his impious principles. [...] To Sergius, the heretic, anathema! To Cyrus, the heretic, anathema! To Honorius, the heretic, anathema!”

So we see that popes have told us that a pope can “wither away into heresy” and “not believe” the Faith; that “it is beyond question” that a pope can “err in matters touching the Faith”, he can “teach heresy” in decrees; that “many Roman Pontiffs were heretics”; that a pope may be a heretic and “teach […] contrary to the Catholic Faith”, in which case we are to follow the instruction “do not follow him”; and that papal heresy “renders lawful the resistance of subordinates to their superiors, and their rejection of the latter's pernicious teachings.”



The teaching of the saints and theologians

The Saints and theologians have told us the same thing through the ages: we must not obey but rather resist wayward pontiffs and their corrupt hierarchies.

The first Doctor of the Church, St. Athanasius († 373), told us that “Catholics faithful to Tradition” can be “reduced to a handful”. He wrote during the Arian crisis, when the global episcopacy defected to Arianism and Pope Liberius († 366) went into heresy, signed a heretical Arian creed and invalidly excommunicated St. Athanasius, as did the heretical bishops of the East:
Quote:“Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ.” (Epistle to the Catholics)

St. Vincent of Lerins († 445) is the Father of the Church most associated with the defence of unchanging doctrinal tradition. It is the subject of his main treatise, the Commonitory. He foresaw that if the whole Church should go into heresy we must keep to the traditional Faith handed down from the Fathers:
Quote:“What then should a Catholic do if some portion of the Church detaches itself from communion of the universal Faith? What choice can he make if some new contagion attempts to poison, no longer a small part of the Church, but the whole Church at once? Then his great concern will be to attach himself to antiquity which can no longer be led astray by any lying novelty.” (Commonitory)

A general corruption of the hierarchy has been foreseen and has happened before and the Saints have told us how we are to respond: we are to keep to the traditional, true Catholic Faith which has been handed down from the Fathers and to reject the “lying novelties” of the pope and the hierarchy.

The theologian Sylvester Prieras, O.P. († 1523) discussed the resistance of a corrupt pope at some length. He asked, “What should be done in cases where the pope destroys the Church by his evil actions?” and “What should be done if the pope wishes unreasonably to abolish the laws of church or state?” His answer was as follows:
Quote:“He would certainly be in sin, and it would be unlawful to allow him to act in such a fashion, and likewise to obey him in matters which are evil; on the contrary, there is a duty to oppose him while administering a courteous rebuke.

“Thus, were he to wish to distribute the Church's wealth, or Peter's Patrimony among his own relatives; were he to wish to destroy the church or to commit an act of similar magnitude, there would be a duty to prevent him, and likewise an obligation to oppose him and resist him. The reason being that he does not possess power in order to destroy, and thus it follows that if he is so doing it is lawful to oppose him.”

“It is clear from the preceding that, if the pope by his commands, orders or by his actions is destroying the church, he may be resisted and the fulfilment of his commands prevented. The right of open resistance to prelates’ abuse of authority stems also from natural law.” (Dialogus de Potestate Papae)

It would be “unlawful to allow him to act in such a fashion”, without any resistance, and “likewise to obey him.” There is “a duty to prevent him, and likewise an obligation to oppose him and resist him.” As he has papal power only to build up the Church and not to destroy it, it is “lawful to oppose him.” He is to be “resisted and the fulfilment of his commands prevented.” “Open resistance” is a right and a duty.

The theologian Tommaso Cardinal de Vio Gaetani Cajetan O.P. († 1534) declared:
Quote:“It is imperative to resist a pope who is openly destroying the Church.” (De Comparata Auctoritate Papae et Concilio).

Such a pope must be resisted, his policies opposed and prevented and true Catholic Faith and practice maintained. Resistance must be established and advanced.

The canonist and theologian, Fr. Francisco de Victoria, O.P. († 1546) told us the same:
Quote:“According to natural law, violence may lawfully be opposed by violence. Now, through the acts permitted and the orders of the kind under discussion, the Pope does commit violence, because he is acting contrary to what is lawful. It therefore follows that it is lawful to oppose him publicly. Cajetan draws attention to the fact that this should not be interpreted as meaning that anybody whosoever can judge the Pope, or assume authority over him, but rather that it is lawful to defend oneself even against him. Every person, in fact, has the right to oppose an unjust action in order to prevent, if he is able, its being carried out, and thus he defends himself.” (Obras, pp. 486-7)

All of the Faithful have the right to oppose the actions of a corrupt pope and to try to prevent his harmful policies from being carried out. It is “lawful to oppose him publicly.”

Adapted from here.

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre: Excerpt from The Mystery of Jesus - "Placed before the Crib..."
Posted by: Stone - 12-13-2022, 10:37 AM - Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - No Replies

Excerpt from The Mystery of Jesus: The Meditations of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre


[Image: ?u=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.fineartamerica.co...ipo=images]



"Placed before the image of the Infant Jesus in the crib, some might be moved to say, “It is not possible, He could not possibly have created the earth; he was just born.” To these St. Paul gives the reply: He was just born, yes, but His Person is a divine Person, and this Person is God, the Word of God. It is truly the Word of God who is there present in the crib, who assumes this body and soul. It is the Word of God, it is this divine Person whom we address. When you speak to someone, you address the person. This Person was the Word of God, by whom all was created. How can anyone then say that this Person who is the Word of God made Man is not Savior, and Priest and King, the three great attributes that this Person gives to this creature of God by the grace of the hypostatic union?*1

"Has any man then the right to be indifferent to the presence of the Word of God in our midst? It is inconceivable. God has willed to come among us; who then has a right to say, “Just let me live my life: I don’t need Jesus Christ to live.” It is unthinkable, especially since He came to save us from our sins. Consequently, we are all affected because we are all sinners. He came to die on the cross to redeem us from eternal damnation; can anyone then be disinterested? And how can they dare to compare this Person who is our Lord Jesus Christ to Mohammed or Budddha or Luther? How can a Catholic who has the Faith utter such words? How can they even speak of “the religions, all the religions, the cults” as if they were equal?

"Pope Pius VII manifested his indignation when presented with the Constitution of France in which was affirmed the freedom of all the religions. He reacted against the words “all the religions.” By these words they were putting the holy religion of God, of our Lord Jesus Christ, on the same level as the heresies and schisms. He was outraged, and he wrote to the Archbishop of Troyes: “Go and see the king. Tell him that it is inadmissible for a Catholic monarch, for a king who calls himself Catholic, to allow the freedom’ of all the religions,’ without distinction.” The Pope was indignant. This should be the conviction of every Catholic.

"It is not possible to be a Catholic and not feel outrage when they speak of “all the religions,” placing thereby our Lord on a par with Buddha and all the rest. They do not believe that our Lord is God. They do not believe that it is the Person of God who is before us. Clearly not. Are there several incarnations of God? In Buddha? In Mohammed? In Luther? No, there is only one, in our Lord Jesus Christ. This fact has enormous consequences, and we should sense this in prOeportion to our belief in the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ.

"What St. John says on this point is very important, as we have seen. It can be summed up in this way: He who affirms that Jesus Christ is God is of God, and he who denies that our Lord Jesus Christ is God is an antichrist (cf. I Jn. 2:22). Antichrist! and, consequently, a devil. St. John, for one, had the Faith, and he knew how to draw the consequences.

"It can be wondered today if there are any real Catholics left among those who call themselves Catholic, because everyone finds it natural to speak of freedom of religion and the liberty of worship. Yet that cannot be conceded, because it is contrary to the dignity of our Lord Jesus Christ. They will accuse you of being intolerant. How many Catholics think the same thing, even m our own Catholic families?

"If you affirm there is only one true religion, the religion of our Lord Jesus Christ, and all the others come from the devil, that they are of the Antichrist because they deny the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, they will accuse you of being intolerant. “So, you want to go back to the Middle Ages,” they will sneer. No, we only want to restore what is: our Lord is King. The day when He comes suddenly in majesty upon the clouds of heaven they will say, “Ah, indeed, He is King; we did not believe it was possible.”

"Yes, our Lord is King, and He will be the only one, there shall be none beside Him. People are not able to convince themselves of it. They are infected by liberalism, by the secularism that affects many. Our Lord Jesus Christ is no longer ascribed his true place.

"His reign must be established on the earth as in heaven.

"It is He himself who said so in the prayer that He taught us, the Our Father: Thy Kingdom come Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. And this must be the object of our prayers, the intention of our sufferings, and the purpose of our life. We must have no rest until our Lord’s reign is established. A Catholic whose heart is not animated by this profound desire is not a Catholic. He is not one of the faithful of our Lord Jesus Christ.[2]


Notes:
1. The union of two natures, divine and human. of Jesus Christ in one unique person, the Person of the divine Word. From the fact that this man Jesus Christ, is God, he is necessarily Savior, Priest, and King.

2. The Mystery of Jesus, The Meditations of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre [Kansas City: Angelus Press, 2000], pp. 23-25.

Print this item

  Pope warns he has seen 'omens of even greater destruction and desolation' for mankind
Posted by: Stone - 12-13-2022, 09:14 AM - Forum: Pope Francis - No Replies

Pope warns he has seen 'omens of even greater destruction and desolation' for mankind

[Image: 65531129-11532695-image-a-1_1670929157433.jpg]

The Pontiff said even more dire times for humanity are set to come in the future
He was speaking at a Mass commemorating the appearance of Mary in 1531


MAILONLINE | 13 December 2022


The Pope has offered a harrowing vision of the future, saying he has seen signs of an even darker time for humanity.

At a Mass at the Vatican, the Pope, 85, said on Sunday that he has a dire vision for the world with 'omens of even greater destruction and desolation'.

The Mass was commemorating the feast of Our Lady Guadalupe. It commemorates the appearance of the Virgin Mary to a young man, Saint Juan Diego, in 1531 in Mexico City. The day is a national holiday in Mexico.

But despite the current difficult times for the world - with wars, particularly Russia's conflict in Ukraine, the rising cost of living, poverty, famine, and an international energy crisis - the Pope said he has a vision that things will get worse.

At a Mass at the Vatican, the Pope said on Sunday that he has a dire vision for the world with 'omens of even greater destruction and desolation'

[Image: 65531135-11532695-image-a-2_1670929368436.jpg]

The Mass was commemorating the feast of Out Lady Guadalupe. It commemorates the appearance of the Virgin Mary to a young man, Saint Juan Diego, in 1531 in Mexico City

In his homily, the pontiff said 'it is a bitter time, filled with the rumbling of war, growing injustice, famine, poverty and suffering,' but at this 'bleak and disconcerting' time, there are 'omens of even greater destruction and desolation.'

He added that at Christmas, God's 'divine love and his coming down to us tell us that this too is a propitious time of salvation, in which the Lord, through the Virgin Mother, continues to give us his Son'.

He urged the Vatican congregation 'to get involved with each other 'without delay,' to go out to meet our brothers and sisters who have been forgotten and discarded by our consumerist and indifferent societies'.

The Pontiff recounted the bible verse from John 3:16: 'God who so loved the world, sent us his Son, born of a woman, so that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life'.

In the celebration of the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe the Pope said that the Virgin Mary 'invites us to leave behind all the prejudices and fears that populate our hearts and to trust in the true God for whom we live, joyfully and confidently directing us to reaffirm our belonging to the Lord.'

In 2031, it will be the 500th year anniversary since the appearance of Mary to the young man in Mexico.

With this in mind, in preparation for the 500 year celebration, Pope Francis called on 'all members of the pilgrim Church in the Americas, pastors and faithful, to participate in this celebratory journey that aims to promote an encounter with God through Our Lady of Guadalupe'.

'She wants to remind us that it was the Gospel that shaped the soul of Latin America, and that as believers in Christ it is our responsibility to be credible witnesses of the love of Jesus Christ and decisive protagonists in building a new culture.'

Print this item

  The Blasphemies of Luther
Posted by: Stone - 12-12-2022, 08:15 AM - Forum: General Commentary - No Replies

The Blasphemies of Luther

[Image: E043_Luther2.jpg]

A reproduction of Luther's face based on his death mask


TIA | June 2012

The Protestants say: “Luther was a tool of God to correct the Church.” I invite you to see whether a man who wrote the blasphemies listed here can be used by God for anything good.

Who was Martin Luther? He was the founder of a religion without sacraments or an ecclesiastic hierarchy, a man who despised the value of pious and penitent works for our salvation. He was an apostate monk who made heretical statements concerning Catholic Doctrine, which can be read below.


On God and Jesus Christ

According to “Table Talk” [Tischreden], the notes of his admirers published in book form, Luther said this about Our Lord Jesus Christ:
  • “Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well of Jacob about whom St. John wrote. ‘Was not everyone around Him murmuring: What has He been doing with her?’ After that, with Mary Magdalene, and then with the woman taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus, even Christ, who was so righteous, had to be guilty of fornication before He died.” (1)
  • “Don’t you think that the drunk Christ, having imbibed too much at the Last Supper, bewildered His disciples with his empty prattling? (2)
  • “Deus est stultissimus” [God is very stupid]. (3)
  • “Certainly God is great and almighty, good and merciful and all that one can imagine in this sense, but He is stupid.” (4)
  • “God always acts like a madman.” (5)

In personal notebooks written by Luther, recently discovered and studied by Fr. Theobald Beer, who published a book on the topic, the heresiarch affirmed that Christ is simultaneously God and Satan, good and evil.

Luther professed a Gnostic and heretical dualism. The Protestants ignore these writings of Luther, and the few preachers who know them, hide them.

Luther blamed God for all crimes of History and affirmed that Judas had no option but to betray Christ, just as Adam did. For God had already determined who would be sinners.


On the Mass


In some “forgotten” notes on the Mass, Luther wrote:
  • “When the Mass will be turned on its head, we will have turned the papacy on its head! Because it is upon the Mass, like a rock, that the papacy is completely supported, with its monasteries, bishoprics, colleges, altars, ministries and doctrine… All this will tumble down when this sacrilegious and abominable Mass tumbles.” (6)
  • On the Offertory, he wrote: “Then follows that abomination which is called the Offertory, where everything in it expresses oblation.” (7)
  • On the Canon of the Mass: “This abominable Canon is a collection of muddled lacunas; … it makes the Mass a sacrifice; offertories are added. The mass is not a sacrifice or the action of one who sacrifices. We see it as a sacrament or a testament. Let us call it a blessing, the eucharist, the table of the Lord or the memorial of the Lord.” (8)
  • On the tactic to install the Protestant mass: “To securely and happily reach our goal, we must keep some of the ceremonies of the old Mass, so that it will be accepted by the weak, who could be scandalized by too hasty changes.” (9)
  • On the priesthood
  • “What a madness to want to monopolize it [the priesthood] only for a few.” (10) For Luther, the priesthood was shared by all the faithful.

On his own behavior: “From morning to evening I do nothing and am drunk. You ask me why I drink so much, why I speak so loquaciously and why I eat so often. It is to fool the Devil who comes to torment me. … It is by eating, drinking, and laughing in this way, and then some more, and even by committing some sin, that I challenge and despise Satan, trying to replace the thoughts the Devil suggests with others, as for example, thinking with avarice of a beautiful girl or in a drunken stupor. Otherwise, I would be too furious.” (11)

“I had up to three wives at the same time.” Two months after he said that, he married a fourth one, a nun. (12)


On the Church

“If we condemn thieves to be hanged, burglars to the scaffold, and heretics to the fire, why should we not use all our weapons against these doctors of perdition, these cardinals, these popes, the whole sequel of the Roman Sodom, so that they will not corrupt the Church of God? Why should we not wash our hands in their blood?” (13)


[img=200x300]In 2011 Benedict XVI went to Erfrut to pay homage to Luther (here & here)[/img]

In 2011 Benedict XVI went to Erfrut to pay homage to Luther (here & here)


1. Lutero, Tischredden, Conversas à mesa, Edição de Weimar, n 1472, vol. 2, p. 107, apud Funck Brentano, Martinho Lutero, Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Vecchi, 1956, p. 15.
2. Apud ibid, p. 135.
3. Lutero, conversas à mesa, n. 963, vol. 1, p. 487, apud F. Brentano, ibid. p. 147.
4. Ibid., apud ibid.
5. Apud ibid., p. 111.
6. Pere Barriele, Avant de Mourir, apud, Lex Orandi: "La Nouvelle Messe et la Foi," Daniel Raffard de Brienne, 1983.
7. Henri Chartier, La Messe Ancienne et la Nouvelle, 1973, apud, Lex Orandi, ibid.
8. Luther, Sermon of the 1er dimanche de l”Avent, apud Lex Orandi, ibid.
9. Jacques Maritain, Trois Réformateurs, apud Lex Orandi, ibid.
10. Leon Cristiani, Du Lutheranisme au Proteatantism, 1900, apud, Lex Orandi, ibid.
11. Marie Carré, J’ai Choisi l’Unité, DPF, 1973, apud Lex Orandi, ibid.
12. Guy Le Rumeur, La Révolte des Hommes et l’Heure de Marie, 1981, apud Lex Orandi, ibid.
13. Hartmann Guisar, Martin Luther, La Vie er son Oeuvre, Paris: Lethielleux, 1931

Print this item

  WHO, Bill Gates Foundation, and Johns Hopkins just completed another Pandemic Simulation
Posted by: Stone - 12-12-2022, 07:48 AM - Forum: Health - No Replies

Catastrophic Contagion

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3...ipo=images]


The Conference took place October 23, 2022 in Brussels, Belgium.

These are the same folks who 'simulated' a coronavirus outbreak in 2019 at 'Event 201.'


From the website, Center for Health Security.org:

Quote:The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, in partnership with WHO and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, conducted Catastrophic Contagion, a pandemic tabletop exercise at the Grand Challenges Annual Meeting in Brussels, Belgium, on October 23, 2022.

The extraordinary group of participants consisted of 10 current and former Health Ministers and senior public health officials from Senegal, Rwanda, Nigeria, Angola, Liberia, Singapore, India, Germany, as well as Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The exercise simulated a series of WHO emergency health advisory board meetings addressing a fictional pandemic set in the near future. Participants grappled with how to respond to an epidemic located in one part of the world that then spread rapidly, becoming a pandemic with a higher fatality rate than COVID-19 and disproportionately affecting children and young people.

Participants were challenged to make urgent policy decisions with limited information in the face of uncertainty. Each problem and choice had serious health, economic, and social ramifications. 


On a webpage entitled, Lessons from the Exercise, here is their summation [emphasis in the original]:

Quote:Lessons from the exercise

Leaders must prepare now to make difficult, critically important decisions with limited information in the early days of the next pandemic in order to increase the chances that a dangerous outbreak can be contained at the source. In the early days of a major new contagious disease epidemic, there could be a brief window of opportunity to stop it from becoming a pandemic. To successfully contain such an outbreak, decisive and bold action would need to be taken in the face of incomplete data, high scientific uncertainty, and potential political resistance. Thinking through such challenges, preparing in advance to react effectively, and practicing through both high-level tabletop and operational exercises should start now.

It may seem like all these critical policy decisions have been resolved during the COVID-19 pandemic, but they have not. In the Catastrophic Contagion simulation, even a group of some of the wisest and most experienced international public health leaders who lived through COVID-19 wrestled with opposing views on whether countries should impose travel restrictions or close schools to try to contain a serious new epidemic that was disproportionately affecting children. The exercise raised a pivotal question: If future pandemics have a much higher lethality than COVID-19, or for example, if they affect predominantly children, would or should countries take different, stronger, earlier measures to contain it, and what are those measures?   

These are not purely public health and scientific decisions; they will be made by leaders in the context of political, economic, and social realities that can be anticipated and considered in advance. Through routine simulations and operational exercises, we can strategically prepare for such challenges ahead of time. The more effectively we can reach scientific and practical consensus on the best approach to very hard but foreseeable problems, the more we will be ready in the future to protect lives and national economies. Political leaders, in addition to health leaders, must be at the table during exercises to respond effectively during the next pandemic.

Countries should establish a global network of professional public health leaders who can work together to improve epidemic preparedness and response and strive for consensus on scientific issues in advance of the next major outbreak. There is no existing worldwide professionalized network of public health preparedness and response leaders who can work together between and during epidemics to better prepare all countries and provide mutual aid and sharing of best practices during serious epidemics. Establishing an international network of national public health leaders, along the lines of the professionalized “Pandemic Corps” referred to in our exercise, could substantially help countries save lives and livelihoods during major epidemics and recover more quickly. Political leaders, who are entrusted with keeping their citizens safe, could benefit from consensus views offered by such a group, rather than having to make impromptu, high consequence policy decisions when lives are at stake during dangerous outbreaks.

Countries should prioritize efforts to increase trust in government and public health; improve public health communication efforts; increase the resiliency of populations to misleading information; and reduce the spread of harmful misinformation. In future pandemics, we should continue to expect even more major disruptions from misinformation and disinformation. The WHO can be a globally trusted source, and it can share science and public health information widely, but we should not expect it alone to combat or put a stop to the spread of this mis- and disinformation. Countries need to collaborate to anticipate that threat and prepare to combat it with their own laws and procedures. Just as many types of economic and societal harms can be anticipated and accounted for in pandemic preparedness plans, so too can predictable false or misleading health messaging. Concertedly exploring ways to address this phenomenon on a national level in advance of the next pandemic will be crucial to saving lives.

WHO member states should strengthen international systems for sharing and allocating scarce public health resources. Groundbreaking global collaborations, such as the ACT-Accelerator and COVAX, were launched during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, public health leaders still lack confidence in current approaches to fairly allocate medical countermeasures during a future pandemic. Even if there were a global commitment around equity for all countries, implementing equitable allocation will continue to be very difficult in the future, especially if there are practical challenges and special requirements like refrigeration or IV administration. Empowering all regions of the world to save lives during a pandemic would increase equitable access to life-saving treatments and vaccines. Therefore, we need to build up manufacturing, distribution, and administration capacities around the world, paying particular attention to countries with poor infrastructure. This should happen now, rather than during a growing pandemic.

It is clear from Catastrophic Contagion that even after the terrible impact of COVID-19, more preparedness work needs to be done, new decisions need to be made, and additional resources committed. We need to expand the limits of our ability to respond.



[Note the fictional journalist who notes that the death tolls are particularly high in children and that this could have been prevented
if countries has more closely followed the WHO's pandemic advice and guidance.]

Print this item

  St. Alphonsus Liguori: Daily Meditations for the Third Week of Advent
Posted by: Stone - 12-12-2022, 07:02 AM - Forum: Advent - Replies (6)

Monday--Third Week of Advent

[Image: ?u=http%3A%2F%2Fuvoc.org%2F3rd_Sun_of_Ad...ipo=images]

Morning Meditation

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE RELIGIOUS STATE - VI
Consider the peace that God gives to good Religious.


St. Teresa used to say that one drop of heavenly consolation is worth more than all the delights of the world. Oh, what contentment does he not find, who, having left all for God, is able to say with St. Francis: "Deus meus et omnia!" -- My God and my All! -- free from the world's slavery, and enjoying the liberty of the Children of God.

I. The promises of God cannot fail. God has said: Every one that has left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting (Matt. xix. 29). That is to say, a hundredfold on this earth, and life everlasting in Heaven.

Peace of the soul is of greater value than all the kingdoms of the world. And what avails it to have dominion over the whole world without interior peace? Better is it to be the poorest peasant in the land and content, than to be the lord of the whole world, and to live a discontented life. But who can give this peace? The world? Oh no, peace is a blessing that is obtained only from God. "O God!" the Church prays, "give to Thy servants that peace which the world cannot give." He is called the God of all consolation (2 Cor. i. 3). But if God be the sole Giver of peace, to whom, think you, will He give that peace if not to those who leave all, and detach themselves from all creatures, in order to give themselves entirely to their Creator? And therefore we see good Religious shut up in their cells, mortified, despised and poor, yet living a more contented life than the great ones of the world, with all the riches, the pomps, and diversions they enjoy.

St. Scholastica said that if men knew the peace good Religious enjoy, the whole world would become a monastery; and St. Mary Magdalen de Pazzi said that if men knew it they would scale the walls in order to get into the monasteries. The human heart having been created for an infinite Good, finite creatures cannot content it. God alone, Who is an Infinite Good can content it: Delight in the Lord and he will give thee the request of thy heart (Ps. xxxvi. 4). Oh no; a good Religious united with God envies none of the princes of the world who possess kingdoms, riches and honours. "Let the rich," he will say with St. Paulinus, "have their riches, the kings have their kingdoms, to me Christ is my kingdom and my glory." He will see lovers of the world foolishly glory in pomp and vanity; but he, seeking to detach himself more from earthly things, and to unite himself more closely to God, will live contented in this life, and may well say: Some trust in chariots, and some in horses, but we call upon the name of the Lord, our God (Ps. xix. 8).

O my Lord and my God, my All! I know that Thou alone canst make me contented in this life and in the next. But I will not love Thee for my own contentment; I will love Thee to content Thy divine Heart. I wish this to be my peace, my only satisfaction during my whole life, to unite my will to Thy holy will, even should I have to suffer pain in order to do this. Thou art my God, I am Thy creature.


II. St. Teresa used to say that one drop of heavenly consolation is worth more than all the delights of the world. Father Charles of Lorraine, having become a Religious, said that God, by one moment of the happiness that He gave him to feel in Religion, superabundantly paid him for all he had left for God. Hence his jubilation was sometimes so great that, when alone in his cell, he could not help dancing for very joy. The Blessed Seraphino of Ascoli, a Capuchin Lay-brother, said that he would not exchange a foot length of his cord for all the kingdoms of the world.

Oh, what contentment does he not find, who, having left all for God is able to say with St. Francis: "My God and my All!" and to see himself thus freed from the servitude of the world, from the thraldom of worldly fashion, and from all purely earthly affections. This is the liberty enjoyed by the children of God, and such good Religious are. It is true that in the beginning, the deprivation of the reunions and pastimes of the world, the observances in Community and of the Rules, seem to be thorns; but these thorns, as Our Lord said to St. Bridget, will all become flowers and delights of Paradise to him who courageously bears their first prickles, and then he will taste on earth that peace which, St. Paul says, surpasseth all the gratification of the senses, the enjoyments of feasts, of banquets, and other pleasures of the world: The peace of God which surpasseth all understanding (Phil. iv. 7). And what greater peace can there be than to know that one pleases God?

And what greater good can I hope for than to please Thee, my Lord and my God, Who hast been so partial in Thy love towards me. Thou, O my Jesus, hast left Heaven to live for love of me a poor and mortified life. I leave all to live only for Thee, my most Blessed Redeemer. I love Thee with my whole heart. If only Thou wilt give me the grace to love Thee, treat me as Thou pleasest.

O Mary, Mother of God, protect me and render me like to thee, not in thy glory which I do not deserve, but in pleasing God, and obeying His Holy Will, as thou didst. Amen.



Spiritual Reading

COUNSELS CONCERNING A RELIGIOUS VOCATION


VII. DETACHMENT

I. From Comforts

In Religion, after the year's Novitiate, besides the Vows of Chastity and Obedience, a Vow of Poverty is made, in consequence of which, if solemn, one can never possess anything as one's own, not even a pin, or income, or money, or any other things. The Community will provide him with all that he needs. But the Vow of Poverty alone will not make one a true follower of Jesus Christ if he does not embrace with joy of spirit all the inconveniences of Poverty. "Not poverty but the love of poverty, is a virtue," says St. Bernard, and he means to say that to become holy it is not enough to be simply poor -- one must also love the inconveniences of poverty. "Oh, how many wish to be poor and like to Jesus Christ," says Thomas a Kempis, "but without wanting for anything!" They would have, in a word, the honour and reward of Poverty, but not the inconveniences of Poverty. It is easy to understand that in Religion no one will seek for things that are superfluous -- garments of silk, choice dishes, valuable furniture, and the like; but he will desire to have all things that are necessary, and these he may be unable to get. It is then he gives proof that he truly loves Poverty, when things that are necessary -- such as the usual clothing, bed-covering or food -- happen to be wanting, if he remains content and is not troubled. And what kind of Poverty would that be never to suffer the want of anything necessary? Father Balthasar Alvarez says that in order truly to love Poverty, we must also love the effects of poverty; that is, as he specifies them: cold, hunger, thirst and contempt.

A Religious must not only be content with that which is given to him, without ever asking for anything which the officials of the Community may have forgotten to furnish him with -- which would be a great defect -- but he must be prepared to suffer, now and then, the want even of those simple things that the Rule allows. For it may happen that sometimes he is in want of clothing, bed-covering, linen, food, and such-like things, and then he has to be satisfied with that little which can be given him, without complaining or being disquieted at seeing himself in want even of what is necessary. He who has not this spirit, ought not to think of entering Religion, because it is a sign that he is not called thereto, or that he has not the will to embrace the spirit of a Religious Institute. "He who goes to serve God in His House," says St. Teresa, "ought to consider that he is going, not to be well treated for God, but to suffer for God."


II. From Relations

He who would enter Religion should be detached from and forget his relations, for, in Religious houses of exact observance, detachment from relations is enforced in the highest degree, in order to follow perfectly the teaching of Jesus Christ Who said: I came not to send peace but the sword: I came to set a man at variance with his father (Matt. x. 34, 35); and He added the reason: A man's enemies shall be they of his own household (Ib. 36). And this is especially the case, as has been remarked already, where there is a question of a Religious Vocation. When a person called by God wishes to leave the world, there are no worse enemies than parents, who, either through interest or passion, prefer to become enemies of God, by turning their children away from their Vocation, rather than give their consent. Oh! how many parents shall we see in the Valley of Josaphat damned for having made their children lose their Religious Vocation! and how many youths shall we see lost who, in order to please their parents, and by not detaching themselves from them, have lost their Vocation and afterwards their souls! Hence, Jesus declares to us: If any man hate not his father and mother and wife and children and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life, he cannot be my disciple (Luke xiv. 26). Let him, then, who wishes to enter a Religious Institute of perfect observance, and to become a true disciple of Jesus Christ, resolve to detach himself from his parents.

And should he have already entered Religion, let him remember that he must practise this same detachment. Let him know that he cannot go to visit his parents in their own house, except in the case of some dangerous illness of his father or mother, or of some urgent necessity, and always with the permission of the Superior. To go to the house of one's parents without this permission would be considered in Religion a most notable and scandalous fault. In Religion it is considered a defect even to ask permission or to show a desire of seeing parents or of speaking with them.

St. Charles Borromeo said that when he visited his family he always, on his return, found himself less fervent in spirit. And let him who goes to his relations by his own will and not through a positive obedience to his Superiors, be persuaded that he will return either tempted or lukewarm.

St. Vincent de Paul could only be induced once to visit his country and his parents, and this out of pure necessity. He said that the love of home and country was a great impediment to his spiritual progress. He narrated how many, on account of having visited their home, had become so tender towards their relatives that they were like flies, which being once entangled in a cobweb, cannot extricate themselves from it. He added: "For that one visit of mine, though it was for a short time only, and though I took care to remove from my relatives every hope of help from me, I, nevertheless, felt at leaving them such pain that I ceased not to weep all along the road, and was for three months harassed by the thought of succouring them. Finally, God in His mercy, took the temptation from me."

Let him know, moreover, that no one can write letters without permission, and without showing them to the Superior. He who would act otherwise would be guilty of a fault that is not to be tolerated in Religion, and he should be punished with severity; for from this might come a thousand disorders tending to destroy the religious spirit. But they especially who have just entered should know that this rule is enforced with the greatest rigour; for novices, during their year of Novitiate, do not easily obtain permission to talk to their parents, or to write to them.

Finally, let it be remembered that should a subject fall ill, it would be a notable defect in him to ask or to show an inclination to go to his own home for his restoration to health, under the plea of better attendance, or of enjoying the benefit of his native air. The air of his own country is almost always, if not indeed always, hurtful and pestilential to the spirit of the subject. And if he should say that he wishes to be cured at home in order to save the Institute expense for remedies, this is no excuse, for he should know that the sick are treated with all care and charity in Religion. As for change of air, the Superiors will think of that; and if the air of one house is not beneficial to him, they will send him to another. And as for remedies, they will even sell their books, if need be, to provide for the sick. And thus he need not fear that Divine Providence will fail him. And if the Lord does not wish his recovery, he ought to conform to the will of God, without even mentioning the word "home." The greatest grace that he who enters Religion can desire is to die, when God wills it, in the House of God, assisted by his brethren in Religion, and not in his home in the world in the midst of his relatives.


Evening Meditation

JESUS IS THE FOUNTAIN OF GRACE.


I.Ye shall draw waters with joy out of the Saviour's fountains (Is. xii. 3).

Consider the four Fountains of grace that we have in Jesus Christ, as contemplated by St. Bernard.

The first is that of Mercy, in which we can wash ourselves from all the filthiness of our sins. This fountain was provided for us by our Redeemer with His tears and His Blood: He loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood (Apoc. i. 5).

The second Fountain is that of Peace and Consolation in our tribulations: Call upon me in the day of trouble, and I will console thee (Ps. xlix. 15). He that thirsteth, let him come to me, says Jesus (Jo. vii. 37). He that thirsteth for true consolations even in this world, let him come to me, for I will satisfy him. He that once tastes the sweetness of My love will forever disdain all the delights of the world: But he that shall drink of the water that I will give him shall not thirst forever (Jo. iv. 13). And thoroughly contented will he be when he shall enter into the kingdom of the blessed, for the water of My grace shall raise him from earth to Heaven. It will become in him a fountain of water springing up into life everlasting (Ibid. 14). The peace which God gives to souls that love Him is not the peace that the world promises from sensual pleasures, which leave behind more bitterness than peace: the peace which God bestows exceeds all the delights of the senses: Peace which surpasseth all understanding. Blessed are those who long for this divine fountain. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice (Matt. v. 6).

O my sweet and dearest Saviour, how much do I not owe Thee? How much hast Thou not obliged me to love Thee, since Thou hast done for me what no servant would have done for his master, no son for his father. If Thou, therefore, hast loved me more than any other, it is just that I should love Thee above all others. I could wish to die of sorrow at the thought that Thou hast suffered so much for me, and that Thou even didst accept for my sake the most painful and ignominious death that a man could endure, and yet I have so often despised Thy friendship. But Thy merits are my hope.

The third Fountain is that of Devotion. Oh, how devoted and ready to follow the divine inspiration and increase always in virtue does not he become who often meditates on all that Jesus Christ has done for our sake! He will be like the tree planted by a stream of water. He shall be like a tree that is planted near the running waters (Ps. i. 3).

The fourth Fountain is that of Charity. In my meditation a fire shall flame out (Ps. xxxviii. 4). It is impossible to meditate on the sufferings and ignominy borne by Jesus Christ for the love of us and not to feel inflamed by that blessed fire which He came upon earth to kindle. How true it is then, that he who betakes himself to these blessed Fountains of Jesus Christ will always draw from them waters of joy and salvation! You shall draw waters with joy out of the Saviour's Fountains.

Ah, my dear Jesus, I too desire to be reckoned amongst the number of Thy lovers. I now esteem Thy grace above all the kingdoms of the earth. I love Thee, and for Thy love I accept every suffering, even death itself. And if I am not worthy to die for Thy glory by the hand of executioners, I accept willingly, at least, that death which Thou hast determined for me; I accept it in the manner and at the time that Thou shalt choose. My Mother Mary, do thou obtain for me the grace always to live and die, loving Jesus.

Print this item

  Archbishop Who Forbids Cassock, Shows Up with Yarmulke
Posted by: Stone - 12-11-2022, 10:59 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism - No Replies

Archbishop Who Forbids Cassock, Shows Up with Yarmulke

[Image: lu8i5i210frm5fu622m3idu7d7buybm3x8ccplc....ormat=webp]


gloria.tv | December 11, 2022


Toulouse Archbishop Guy de Kerimel, France, has been seen wearing a Jewish yarmulke on the square of his cathedral (Medias-Press.info, December 1).

He was accompanied by Albi Archbishop Jean Mary Legrez, and Haïm Korsia, Chief Rabbi of France. The occasion for the performance is unknown.

Kerimel is known for persecuting the Mass, forbidding his seminarians to wear a cassock, and playing ball during his induction eucharist in Toulouse. [See video in original link]

Print this item

  Cdl. Burke, Bp. Schneider send messages of support to Brazilians protesting disputed Bolsonaro defea
Posted by: Stone - 12-10-2022, 08:23 AM - Forum: Global News - No Replies

Cdl. Burke, Bp. Schneider send messages of support to Brazilians protesting disputed Bolsonaro defeat
The St. Boniface Institute's Alexander Tschugguel also sent a video message to the people in Brazil, 
saying that 'you who are fighting to save your country from a communist takeover are not alone.'

[Image: GettyImages-1244381718-scaled-810x500.jpeg]

Heuler Andrey/Getty Images)

Dec 9, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) — Cardinal Raymond Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider have issued messages of support for the massive protests in Brazil over potential election fraud.

“I encourage all in the government of Brazil to take very seriously the responsibility in the present situation, and I will be praying very much that they see the wisdom and strength to do what is right at this critical moment,” Burke said in an interview with the St. Boniface Institute, an Austrian Catholic organization led by co-founder Alexander Tschugguel.


Burke appears to share the concerns of the millions of Brazilians who are taking to the streets daily. The Cardinal was asked the following question in the interview:

Quote:Your Eminence, for six weeks now, millions of citizens have been demonstrating and camping out in front of the army barracks all over Brazil to protest against the proposed communist takeover facilitated by rigged elections. Do you have a message for these courageous people and the Brazilian government?

Burke replied: “Certainly what you are saying is true.”

“I offer every encouragement not only to the people but to those who are responsible presently for the government in Brazil that they will act according to God’s will, according to what is just and right in order to serve the good of all the people of Brazil,” the American Cardinal continued.

RELATED: Millions in Brazil continue election fraud protests following Bolsonaro’s alleged defeat

Bishop Schneider, who spent several years as a priest in Brazil, gave his message of encouragement to the protestors in Portuguese. It was published on the St. Boniface Institute’s YouTube channel


“People of goodwill all over the world know about your situation,” Schneider said. “We Catholics are praying for our Brazilian brothers and sisters. I want to encourage all Brazilians! Our Lady is with you; she is the most powerful force in the world.”

Commenting on the lack of legacy media coverage that the massive protests in the South American country received, Schneider stated that “[m]ainstream media has abandoned you at this difficult time after your election. But honest people all over the world know about your situation.”

“You may now — for a short period — be suffering oppression and persecution from dictatorial forces, but God will not abandon Brazil. Brazil belongs to Christ, to Our Lady.”

Tschugguel himself also sent a video message to the people in Brazil, saying that “you who are fighting to save your country from a communist takeover are not alone.”


“There are many people outside of Brazil, here in Austria, Germany, France, Italy, Hungary, the United States, and many other countries who know what you are going through, who support your fight, who pray for you, and who are hoping that you will win and the communist will not take power,” Tschugguel continued.

“At our weekly rosary rallies here in Vienna, we have been praying publicly for your intentions for weeks now. We know that your election was rigged. We know about the massive fraud. The truth about Brazil is now spreading throughout the world.”

“Your country now has the chance to show the world that if the people stand firm, evil can be defeated,” the Austrian Catholic stated. “You can prove to everyone that no tyrant stands a chance if a people strengthened by the Grace of God Almighty simply won’t back down.”

These messages of encouragement are a response to what some are calling the biggest political protest in history. Tens of millions of Brazilians have taken to the streets in nearly every city in the country for more than 30 days straight to oppose what they say was an election result stolen from President Jair Bolsonaro. Some believe the military may intervene to prevent the certification of the supposed winner of the race, socialist Lula da Silva.

Following reports of his alleged 50.9%-49.1% loss to Lula, President Bolsonaro filed a lawsuit with the Superior Electoral Court claiming massive voting machine irregularities. However, the left-wing Justice Alexandre de Moraes tossed out the case. De Moraes proceeded to censure conservatives who questioned the validity of the results on social media. He also froze the bank accounts of truck drivers who blocked hundreds of roads across the country. Bolsonaro has addressed the public twice since the election was held but has not expressly conceded the race. According to Reuters, the head of the US Central Intelligence Agency told Bolsonaro last year that he should not challenge the results of the race.

RELATED: Protests in Brazil intensify as rumors swirl military may intervene in presidential election dispute

Investigative journalist Matthew Tyrmand recently told Steve Bannon on his War Room podcast that “They’re going to have to execute some form of 142-driven Marshal Law.”

Section 142 of Brazil’s constitution empowers the president to direct the military to bring law and order to the country when such a need arises.

Tyrmand said on Tucker Carlson Tonight that the military “has a special role in the Brazilian constitution,” because “they are the ones to adjudicate separation of power disputes.” 


Tyrmand stated that he believes the military will take power in this situation: “It looks like this will be coming to a head.”

Print this item